Support NeoGAF

[Men_in_Boxes]

Is my own gameplay experience reliable enough?

For you, yes. For the market? No.

I played Overwatch almost every day for several years. It slowly got worse and less fun

Like all games get less fun over time?

until Overwatch 2 was the final nail that killed it completely (as in, even off my hard drive). Believe it or not, I didn't play any other online FPS game for months. I just dropped the genre for a while, and WANTED to like Overwatch. To add to that, I was the only one in my group of friends into the game and tried to spread it. Now I'm kinda glad it didn't work so I didn't end up embarassed that I pushed a sixty dollar game that turned into a F2P shitshow.

The entire rest of the Internet agrees with my opinion

False. The internet is bigger than you realize. There's still a ton of people playing the game today who do not share your opinion.

but maybe I should be more skeptical and dig for reliable data before deciding how to feel about this game. Both PUBG and Fortnite came out in 2017 and didn't seem to stymie Overwatch's meteoric ascension.

False. Overwatch got gutted with the rise of PUBG and Fortnite. It went from being the biggest multiplayer game of the year to a top 30 most popular multiplayer game as soon as BR took off.

The only thing that fucked Overwatch was Overwatch. This is like an abusive girlfriend blaming your new one for breaking up with her.

Simple fact is Overwatch lost a lot of what made it endearing, while insulting everyone. There are other options so people took them. If you actually read the Steam reviews, the ones that aren't jokes are well-written cogent reviews that break down what legitimately went wrong with the game. It's been so well documented that if I wanted to leave a review, I would just shitpost. There's nothing left to add that hasn't been said many times over.

I have 1,000x more faith in highly accomplished game developers than I do "gamerz" who review bomb products online.

 

[BlackTron]

For you, yes. For the market? No.

False. The internet is bigger than you realize. There's still a ton of people playing the game today who do not share your opinion.

Okay, if they think they can make more money and please "the market" by taking an existing game and changing it into a P2W scheme, more power to them. Shockingly, people out there have an opinion to express about this.

Not that it worked. Did they put OW2 on Steam because it was doing particularly well? I thought they were so desperate they had no choice but to put themselves in the crosshairs of its review section. You know, like how Halo Infinite also ran to steam when it shit the bed.

Imagine if you bought Zelda 1, then I came into your house and changed the chip in the cartridge to Zelda 2 "For Free". When you complain, I just say you are wrong, lots of people like Zelda 2! Only in this case you don't even get Zelda 2, you get a shitty P2W scheme! And because lots of people out there LIKE this shitty P2W scheme, any review with a negative opinion of this outcome must be garbage!

Like all games get less fun over time?

My decreasing enjoyment and appreciation of OW was directly correlated with game updates.

I have 1,000x more faith in highly accomplished game developers than I do "gamerz" who review bomb products online.

This is just a catch-all. SEGA, a highly accomplished game developer, releases a broken game. The review bombings prove that SEGA in fact didn't release a broken game, because we trust them 1000x more.

 

[ManaByte]

You know, like how Halo Infinite also ran to steam when it shit the bed.

Halo Infinite is the best MP shooter at the moment. Show's what you know.

 

[BlackTron]

Halo Infinite is the best MP shooter at the moment. Show's what you know.

I already stated that I play Halo almost every day and used it as an example of a FPS that doesn't compromise gameplay to be F2P. Doesn't change the fact that the game shit the bed back then and lost tons of players. Which is why it went to Steam...that's the point.

Personally, I never stopped playing it, because the core game was very good, which is all I'm after. Did I understand why the progression system, anemic map updates, feature delays and lack of content turned off "the market"? Absolutely. They failed in tasks outside the core gameplay badly. I didn't go around telling everyone they were wrong for dropping the game then. I wasn't blind to the flaws. But because you guys still like playing Overwatch, you can't accept that they done fucked it up for many others that have a valid opinion.

 

[ManaByte]

Which is why it went to Steam...that's the point.

It went to Steam because MS is putting all their games on Steam.

 

[TheShocker]

Pronouns and the stupid, “my opinions are my own.”

Cry more dude(ette). Whatever you are.

 

[BlackTron]

It went to Steam because MS is putting all their games on Steam.

Actually you're right and I think my memory is completely busted here. I had this recollection that the game came to Steam later on but actually wasn't it on Steam day one?

I'm conflating memories of MCC, doh

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Okay, if they think they can make more money and please "the market" by taking an existing game and changing it into a P2W scheme, more power to them. Shockingly, people out there have an opinion to express about this.

I appreciate your opinion. We just disagree entirely, which is great.

Not that it worked. Did they put OW2 on Steam because it was doing particularly well? I thought they were so desperate they had no choice but to put themselves in the crosshairs of its review section. You know, like how Halo Infinite also ran to steam when it shit the bed.

Didn't Halo Infinite launch on Steam? Also, why does the game coming to more platforms effect you negatively?

Imagine if you bought Zelda 1, then I came into your house and changed the chip in the cartridge to Zelda 2 "For Free". When you complain, I just say you are wrong, lots of people like Zelda 2! Only in this case you don't even get Zelda 2, you get a shitty P2W scheme! And because lots of people out there LIKE this shitty P2W scheme, any review with a negative opinion of this outcome must be garbage!

That analogy makes no sense. It's such a wild misrepresentation of Overwatch that I must classify you as temporarily unhinged.

My decreasing enjoyment and appreciation of OW was directly correlated with game updates.

They have to do what they think is best for the product. I'm sorry you don't like the changes but I'm seeing very few that objectively hurt the gameplay experience.

This is just a catch-all. SEGA, a highly accomplished game developer, releases a broken game. The review bombings prove that SEGA in fact didn't release a broken game, because we trust them 1000x more.

Yes, it is possible that a large accomplished company makes poor choices here or there. I'm still taking Blizzard knowing what to do with OW2 over gamerz.

 

[Moochi]

I can't expose myself to the toxicity that is Overwatch 2.

 

[Killer8]

How about making a better game? If you knew months in advance that you were going to get review bombed then IMPROVE the fucking product! Don't come crying that Bobby didn't give you a dedicated team to deal with the angry customers that YOU have created.

 

[ManaByte]

How about making a better game? If you knew months in advance that you were going to get review bombed then IMPROVE the fucking product! Don't come crying that Bobby didn't give you a dedicated team to deal with the angry customers that YOU have created.

They did improve it. They removed the fucking loot box casino. Some people are mad about that.

 

[BlackTron]

I appreciate your opinion. We just disagree entirely, which is great.

Didn't Halo Infinite launch on Steam? Also, why does the game coming to more platforms effect you negatively?

Yes, we addressed this. And when did I ever say, or even imply, that coming to more platforms affects me negatively?

That analogy makes no sense. It's such a wild misrepresentation of Overwatch that I must classify you as temporarily unhinged.


They have to do what they think is best for the product. I'm sorry you don't like the changes but I'm seeing very few that objectively hurt the gameplay experience.

This is where the disconnect is. To me, if a multiplayer game doesn't allow every player the same set of options, it's invisible. It doesn't even count as a game to me, it's just a corporate money siphoning scheme abusing human psychology. It's like if Activision bought the exclusve rights to Chess, but added types of pieces that you needed to pay to unlock and use. Obviously, the integrity of Chess as a game would be completely broken, both in real-time play and from a "meta" standpoint. Dumpster fire.

It's been said that OW matches are decided on the character selection screen. Since when did how much I paid affect my tactical decisions and real time gameplay in Overwatch? Oh that's right...ever since they replaced it with Overwatch 2! If you can't even tell the difference (objectively lol), you were never in it for the game anyway, just for mindless entertainment/flashing lights that are interactive and social. "The Experience."

When every player is on the same playing field by default and this is enforced, there's the capacity for integrity as a competitive game, even casually (see Chess example above). They gave that up for the (real or imagined) money. I hear mobile makes a lot of money, should every game ditch its integrity and follow "the market" now? Some games do, some don't, and that's fine. But don't sell me a game and then flip it please. Or you'll hear about it on Steam apparently lol. By the way all the negative reviews that are actually typed out as a real review say this same thing. It's not just a wall of "fuck OW because reasons and I'm mad and also it's popular"

Yes, it is possible that a large accomplished company makes poor choices here or there.

A real life gamer said this?

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Yes, we addressed this. And when did I ever say, or even imply, that coming to more platforms affects me negatively?



This is where the disconnect is. To me, if a multiplayer game doesn't allow every player the same set of options, it's invisible. It doesn't even count as a game to me, it's just a corporate money siphoning scheme abusing human psychology. It's like if Activision bought the exclusve rights to Chess, but added types of pieces that you needed to pay to unlock and use. Obviously, the integrity of Chess as a game would be completely broken, both in real-time play and from a "meta" standpoint. Dumpster fire.

It's been said that OW matches are decided on the character selection screen. Since when did how much I paid affect my tactical decisions and real time gameplay in Overwatch? Oh that's right...ever since they replaced it with Overwatch 2! If you can't even tell the difference (objectively lol), you were never in it for the game anyway, just for mindless entertainment/flashing lights that are interactive and social. "The Experience."

When every player is on the same playing field by default and this is enforced, there's the capacity for integrity as a competitive game, even casually (see Chess example above). They gave that up for the (real or imagined) money. I hear mobile makes a lot of money, should every game ditch its integrity and follow "the market" now? Some games do, some don't, and that's fine. But don't sell me a game and then flip it please. Or you'll hear about it on Steam apparently lol. By the way all the negative reviews that are actually typed out as a real review say this same thing. It's not just a wall of "fuck OW because reasons and I'm mad and also it's popular"


A real life gamer said this?

Is basketball a game/sport?

People with different amounts of money can buy $30 dollar shoes at Walmart and compete against people with $240 dollar Jordans that weigh less than half of the Walmart shoes. I guess basketball is not a game / sport but instead a...checks notes...DUMPSTER FIRE.

Also, I guess Dota 2 and League of Legends aren't games because they've been doing what you described for a decade by now.

 

[BlackTron]

Is basketball a game/sport?

People with different amounts of money can buy $30 dollar shoes at Walmart and compete against people with $240 dollar Jordans that weigh less than half of the Walmart shoes. I guess basketball is not a game / sport but instead a...checks notes...DUMPSTER FIRE.

This is like saying that a title isn't a game/sport because you can buy a better computer and run it at 240hz. A better analogy would be a basketball game that charges you $30 for an enhanced jumping move, or if real-life basketball actually tied upgrading sneaker mechanics into the rules of the game.

Also, I guess Dota 2 and League of Legends aren't games because they've been doing what you described for a decade by now.

I'm not a huge fan of these games either, though it's not as egregious as Overwatch. Somewhat like fighting games, you select your character at the start and stick with it through the match. It's not great, but not as bad as OW, where you can switch mid-match and many do to counter as part of the rock/paper/scissors dynamic. At that point, OW's characters become an in-game, fluid and changing tactical choice, but every player has a different set based on investment. To me, yeah, that's a dumpster fire.

Imagine playing Starcraft but your choice of what tech upgrade to research was influenced by prior purchases...before you go any further its integrity of what it used to be as a legitimate 1v1 game is already completely thrown out the window. The ramifications of the change are so blatantly obvious and far-reaching that it would be daunting to even begin trying to break it down or discuss it; you'd just say "holy shit" and give up. It might even still be a fun game, unless you had already bought the non-fucked version.

Yes, Overwatch is a "game", but I'm drawing a distinction between a bunch of interactive flashing lights for entertainment and a "real game" that prioritizes gameplay integrity. It's a money siphoning scheme first, and a game second. Again, nothing wrong with that for those who want it, but I already purchased a different game. The difference isn't that hard to see, even if you don't care about it, unless you are intentionally blind or have trouble understanding the concept of fairness.

 

[kiphalfton]

The problem with a lot of these habitual complainers, is they don't realize they look bad posting this garbage to social media.

This is something that should be handled privately.

Even then you can realistically complain once, but after that you're going to get a bad rep.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

This is like saying that a title isn't a game/sport because you can buy a better computer and run it at 240hz. A better analogy would be a basketball game that charges you $30 for an enhanced jumping move, or if real-life basketball actually tied upgrading sneaker mechanics into the rules of the game.

So the athlete who hires a coach, goes to the gym, and eats healthy (all cost money) has a jumping advantage over his or her peer who's unable to do those things.

You've set up strict rules that you are forced to break in all walks of life. Why are you applying them so strictly to OW2?

If anything, Blizzard is following the rules of nature which give people advantages based on level of investment. It's literally objectively beautiful design.

In fact, teaching kids that they're owed content that talented, hard working people poured their soul into leads to an existential doomed philosophy that must be fought against.

I'm not a huge fan of these games either, though it's not as egregious as Overwatch. Somewhat like fighting games, you select your character at the start and stick with it through the match. It's not great, but not as bad as OW, where you can switch mid-match and many do to counter as part of the rock/paper/scissors dynamic. At that point, OW's characters become an in-game, fluid and changing tactical choice, but every player has a different set based on investment. To me, yeah, that's a dumpster fire.

Dumpster fires typically don't retain huge player bases.

Imagine playing Starcraft but your choice of what tech upgrade to research was influenced by prior purchases...before you go any further its integrity of what it used to be as a legitimate 1v1 game is already completely thrown out the window. The ramifications of the change are so blatantly obvious and far-reaching that it would be daunting to even begin trying to break it down or discuss it; you'd just say "holy shit" and give up. It might even still be a fun game, unless you had already bought the non-fucked version.

Yes, Overwatch is a "game", but I'm drawing a distinction between a bunch of interactive flashing lights for entertainment and a "real game" that prioritizes gameplay integrity. It's a money siphoning scheme first, and a game second. Again, nothing wrong with that for those who want it, but I already purchased a different game. The difference isn't that hard to see, even if you don't care about it, unless you are intentionally blind or have trouble understanding the concept of fairness.

Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow? No, says BlackTron! Gamers demand free, free, free!

 

[BlackTron]

So the athlete who hires a coach, goes to the gym, and eats healthy (all cost money) has a jumping advantage over his or her peer who's unable to do those things.

You've set up strict rules that you are forced to break in all walks of life. Why are you applying them so strictly to OW2?

If anything, Blizzard is following the rules of nature which give people advantages based on level of investment. It's literally objectively beautiful design.

In fact, teaching kids that they're owed content that talented, hard working people poured their soul into leads to an existential doomed philosophy that must be fought against.

Dumpster fires typically don't retain huge player bases.

You heard it here folks. Overwatch taking on a pay-to-keep-up model is embracing the rules of nature and literally objectively beautiful design. In fact, it's teaching kids an important lesson!

This is it, the the line that made me question everything and wonder if you have just been a troll this whole time. The alternative reality that this a sincere assertion that really came from a human mind is terrifying.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

You heard it here folks. Overwatch taking on a pay-to-keep-up model is embracing the rules of nature and literally objectively beautiful design. In fact, it's teaching kids an important lesson!

This is it, the the line that made me question everything and wonder if you have just been a troll this whole time. The alternative reality that this a sincere assertion that really came from a human mind is terrifying.

Why do you feel owed?

I genuinely don't understand the "This company should just perpetually give me free content" mentality.

 

[CuNi]

Yes. People download the game, logged on it for 5 minutes and made a negative review.

It's a obvious case of review-bombing.

Not justifying ALL negative reviews, but just brushing off 5-min reviews as "obvious review bombing" is not correct in this situation either.
I, too, left a negative review with, I don't know 5–10 Minutes of Steam gameplay time, but I played the game for a good portion before it even hit steam.
There was no review option on battle.net, and I'm not going to chase all review sites to write a bad review there. But Steam was a good platform to write that bad review, and so I did.

I cannot tell you what percentage is true "just for the memes" review bombing and how many of those low playtime reviews actually played the time before and are justified, but neither can you.
We all agree that the game became way worse after the changes and then killing off the campaign, which was the initial reason to even make an "Overwatch 2", did not help them gain any sympathy points.

 

[BlackTron]

Why do you feel owed?

I genuinely don't understand the "This company should just perpetually give me free content" mentality.

I don't. I'm willing to pay for a game. This has already been covered. But I really think you know that and are just trolling. lol

 

[Heart_Attack]

Pronouns in bio. No wonder Activision/Blizzard went to shit. It was taken over by these nutjobs.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

I don't. I'm willing to pay for a game. This has already been covered. But I really think you know that and are just trolling. lol

Honestly, I think what you're saying is so crazy that I find myself forced to become crazy in order to deal with your position. I have stared too long into the abyss.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I can't expose myself to the toxicity that is Overwatch 2.

Overwatch does have an objectively horrible community and that is saying a lot in the world of online multiplayer shooters

 

[Cyberpunkd]

Overwatch does have an objectively horrible community and that is saying a lot in the world of online multiplayer shooters

Cartoon shooter with waifus is serious shit.

 

[3liteDragon]

As someone who has close to 300 hours on 2 & 750 hours in total with OW1, OW1 was way better. 2's fucking ass, the competitive ranking system is ass, the play of the game system is trash, game economy's shit & the hero balancing fucking sucks. Going from 6v6 to 5v5 might've been one of the worst things to happen to the game. I still play it cause that's all my friends play lol.

So yea, Kotick isn't the one to blame for this.

 

[Doomtrain]

I loved OW1 back in the day and couldn't get into OW2. Maybe it's death by a thousand cuts, but they made huge numbers of tiny design decisions over time that made me enjoy the game less, and then they made a bunch of them all at once when the game became OW2. I miss the game I originally paid for and I think it was a shitty move on Blizzard's part to essentially destroy OW1 and replace it with OW2.

 

[Jack Package]

Maybe if they'd actually delivered the game they claimed they were making, they wouldn't have been review bombed then.
"It's Bobby's fault!"

Yes, he is an arsehole, but your team fucked this one.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

Bobby Kotick is a dick, for sure. He's a bloody good gaming publisher CEO, but I'm sure he is a dick.

That said, the launch of OW2 on steam I'm sure had nothing to do with the fact that... you know... the game was shit and reviewed like ass.

 

[BlackTron]

Honestly, I think what you're saying is so crazy that I find myself forced to become crazy in order to deal with your position. I have stared too long into the abyss.

One more time in a way you may be able to understand.

I'm willing to pay for a game. If said game allows me (or anyone else in it) to acquire a competitive advantage just by spending money, then I don't want to pay for it anymore. While not as extreme, I may as well just buy a Cronus Max and pat myself on the back every time I kill someone instead of getting dragged into buying characters, items, gems or whatever.

Has NOTHING to do with not wanting to spend money WHATSOEVER. Starcraft -another game that went free and supported with small purchases, none of which impacted its integrity as a game. Extra modes, missions, voices, graphics packs and such. Enter a MP match and the outcome is decided by your decisions in the game with no effect whatsoever by the unique recent bank account activity of each participant. Kind of like...Overwatch 1!

I bought Starcraft 2 and all expansions day one. If Starcraft 2 locked new units behind a paywall, I wouldn't have bought it, not because I hate losing money, but because I bought it to receive a real hardcore multiplayer competitive game, not a human psychology black hole. If they made this change AFTER I bought the game, I'd have been pissed. Welcome to the world of Overwatch.

Yes, going back as far as Brood War, expansions added new units. The difference is that in order for them to be available in a match every player involved needed to own them. That's how rules in a legitimate comp game work...the entire point of OW characters is for you to have to buy them to keep up with everyone else you see running around using them. It's about fleecing you, not making a good game. The thing is, even if you buy them all, the game design is still broken by making them paid and will never be balanced fairly. So why bother? Great if you just wanted flashy lights social pew pew entertainment. Bad if you wanted a real ass game like the one you already bought, was deleted, and replaced "for free".

I'm not asking you to agree, just to understand what I'm saying without hurting your brain. You can think that this is the most literally objectively perfect game design in the world! But if you can't even appreciate or comprehend the difference between the two, no wonder you act like everyone who disagrees with you is stupid.

 

[ViciousAgenda]

Bobby Gigachad tbh